Family Friday ~ Price Polygamy ~ Part Three

 

Wilhelmina Barbara Gray

Continuing on with the polygamous life of my 2nd great-grandfather we will talk about his fourth wife who also becomes his ex-wife. 

"He was married to Wilhelmina Gray February 6, 1887 at the Logan Temple. Mrs. Gray was a widow with two children, Lou and Janet, by a former marriage, who came to Paris as a practicing obstetrician. She was a convert from Scotland, and a graduate from an obstetrical school in her native land. She became widely known as a mid-wife in the Bear Lake settlements during the eighties and nineties; and undoubtedly many a child born during those years when doctors were few and poorly trained, owed their lives to the good practical nursing of Mrs. Gray. Two sons were born to Robert and Wilhelmina: Matthew, born December 20, 1888 David Robert born February 3, 1891. Robert built Wilhelmina a good house near the shingle mill, where she lived for many years, continuing to practice her profession under her original name—Mrs. Gray."  --page 144, Robert Price, by Ezra J. Poulsen

This marriage lasted about nine years before she decided she had enough of that lifestyle. 

"The marriage between Robert and Wilhelmina Gray ended in a divorce, which was granted by the local district court April 11, 1906. A property settlement was made, after which Wilhelmina moved to Idaho Falls, where she made her home. The oldest son Matthew, continued to live in Paris as a member of his father’s family, and became a promising young business man. He owned and operated the Novelty Theatre, assisted by his wife Vinnie. They brought the first talking pictures to Paris, and were looking forward to a successful and happy life when he met an untimely death in an automobile accident. The younger son, David, went to Idaho Falls with his mother, and made his permanent home there, where he married Pauline Vogel at the age of nineteen and became a successful barber." --page 165, Robert Price, by Ezra J.  Poulsen

 I found a couple of articles in the newspaper about the divorce. A divorce case involving a plural marriage is tricky...

The Idaho Statesman, Boise, Idaho - Thursday, April 19, 1906

Price Gray divorce

Article from Apr 19, 1906 The Idaho Statesman (Boise, Idaho)

As you can see, this is a lengthy article. You can click on the image and go read the article. I will transcribe a few paragraphs here and highlight the interesting bits. Well...I was going to highlight it but Blogger won't let me. It seems to be having an issue so I'll just underline the good parts..lol.

Sitting for Judge Budge at Paris Bear Lake county Judge Price was recently called upon to decide a divorce case entitled Welhelmina Price plaintiff vs Robert Price defendant The defendant was a polygamist and the Issue in the case was the status of the third wife married to the defendant after the death of the first wife The decision is of great interest as showing the complexities that may be interjected into the family relations of those practicing polygamy The status of persons under a marriage contract in cases in which only one wife is involved often has to be taken into the courts that entanglements may be straightened out and the complications in cases of polygamous families are multiplied as illustrated by the case under consideration the decision in which is as follows: 

Plaintiff sues the defendant for divorce on the ground of abandonment Defendant denies the marriage. The parties to the action are Mormons and the defendant a polygamist since 1864. The facts in the case as proved and stipulated are as follows: The defendant was married to Matilda Kelsey in 1855 and while so married in 1864 and in 1875 respectively he married in polygamy Susannah Juchau and Christina Shepherd. In 1887 after the death of Matilda in the same year Susannah and Christina both then and since living he married the plaintiff by a ceremonial marriage which is conceded to have been in due form in all respects and which constituted a marriage contract between them if such was intended and both parties at liberty under the law to contract a marriage. The plaintiff knew of the status of the defendant in his relations to Susannah and Christina at the time of the said ceremony and she and defendant went secretly and by different routes to a Mormon temple for the purpose of the ceremony after which they returned to their home in the same manner since which time down to the year 1901 they continued to live and cohabit together as husband and wife. Two sons were born to them one now I5 and the other 10 years old. During this period the defendant continued and now continues in the same relation with Susannah and Christina with the full knowledge of the plaintiff.

In the year 1901 the plaintiff announced to the defendant that she would no longer consent to his living with Susannah and Christina and that she would not live with him as his wife unless defendant would discontinue his polygamous relations with them. That if he would discontinue such relations she would continue to live with him as his wife but not otherwise. Defendant thereupon stated that he could not consider a severance with his two other women and after bidding the plaintiff and the children a formal good-bye and telling them that he should not return left the separate home which he had provided for them and has not appeared there since although he has ever since provided for their support as theretofore.

The plaintiff contends: 1 That the defendant having no lawful wife living at the time of the marriage ceremony between her and the defendant and there being no legal impediment to the marriage she thereby became his lawful wife. 

2 That defendant's refusal to live with her alone as her husband “abandoning all others and cleaving only unto her” constitutes abandonment and entitles her to divorce. 

To meet this contention the defendant presents evidence to the effect that after the said ceremony and during the period of about 14 years of their living together the plaintiff whose name was Wilhelmina Gray was generally known as and called Sister Gray and Mrs Gray in the community at Paris where they lived: and that she had an account with a store keeper under that name and it is also shown that she was regarded as the defendant's plural wife by their co-religionists. Evidence was also produced by the defendant of the execution by him of several legal instruments in which Susannah joined as his wife and that he had selected her and at various times when occasion and opportunity offered held her out to the world as his lawful wife after the death of Matilda and the marriage ceremony with the plaintiff. 

The defendant contends: 

1 That upon the death of Matilda by reason of the facts above stated Susannah became his lawful wife by a "common law marriage” and that she was such at the time of the ceremony with the plaintiff and that thus having a lawful wife at the time of the ceremony the plaintiff become only his plural or polygamous wife as recognized by the Mormon church. 

2 That this was what they intended by the ceremony. That the relation created by the secret ceremony in the temple to which they secretly and privately went although a legal marriage ceremony in form was not and is not such as the law of the land recognizes and approves as a lawful marriage. That by reason of his two plural wives upheld as a matter of religion by the church of which they are both members and a tenet of the faith to which they both subscribe it was not although a valid and binding marriage within the Mormon church a valid and binding marriage under the laws of the state. That the common belief in the sanctity of plural marriage entertained by the parties with the defendant actually living in plural marriage at the time precluded the plaintiff not only from expecting or anticipating that the defendant would cleave exclusively unto her although requiring her to cleave exclusively unto him but precluded her well from regarding the church marriage in any other light than he regarded it or if not that then their minds did not meet in full agreement as to what the relation should be in which event there would be no marriage contract. 

 And then here is a news clip of the verdict:

Montpelier ExaminerFri, Apr 20, 1906 ·Page 5

So Grandpa Robert wouldn't leave his two first polygamous wives to have a normal God-ordained marriage with one wife. I am proud of Wilhelmina for sticking to her guns!

If you are an x-Mormon and have a testimony of how Jesus saved you from the grips of Mormonism please consider sharing your story to glorify God. Drop me a line at AwakeOSleeper@currently.com